Re: A new category of thought

From	polcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.logic, sci.math, comp.theory
Subject	Re: A new category of thought
Date	2025-12-08 19:00 -0600
Message-ID	<10h7sap$1brfc$1@solani.org> (permalink)
References	(19 earlier) <42rZQ.225830$uGW5.38065@fx14.iad> <10h5ghl$3t4f3$1@dont-email.me> <nHzZQ.71914$D_G4.7104@fx48.iad> <10h76fq$b30a$1@dont-email.me> <cVJZQ.1338$C_K8.154@fx42.iad>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 12/8/2025 6:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 12/8/25 1:47 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/8/2025 6:40 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 12/7/25 10:26 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/7/2025 8:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 12/7/25 6:15 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/7/2025 4:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/7/25 8:37 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/7/2025 6:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/6/25 10:50 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/6/2025 9:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/6/25 4:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two kinds of dictionaries. One kind is 
>>>>>>>>>>>> dictionaries that
>>>>>>>>>>>> define words of one language in terms of words of another 
>>>>>>>>>>>> language.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no circularity there. The other kind describes the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> meanings
>>>>>>>>>>>> of wirds in terms of words of the same language. They are 
>>>>>>>>>>>> circular
>>>>>>>>>>>> and the descriptions are often incomplete or inexact. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dictionaries
>>>>>>>>>>>> of this kind are indeed useless to readers who don't already 
>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>>>>> the meanings of most of the words from other sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is where Peter just falls apart, as he doesn't 
>>>>>>>>>>> understand how formal langagues work.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No. It is that you don't understand how
>>>>>>>>>> Montague Grammar or Knowledge Ontologies work.
>>>>>>>>>> Thankfully LLM systems know all about these things.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, it is you who doesn't know what he is saying and shows he 
>>>>>>>>> is just a liar.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If that was true you could show that with reasoning.
>>>>>>>> By not showing the reasoning you show that is not true.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You have ADMITED that you retain the right to change the meaning 
>>>>>>> of word.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DENY THAT IF YOU WANT.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you can change the meaning of words, then semantics are 
>>>>>>> worthless, as meaning is broken,.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry, but you are just showing that you don't understand what 
>>>>>>> you are talking about.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will note aas proof: a part you snipped said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >> I will issue you a challenge here, and failure to reply will 
>>>>>>> be an admission that you know you are just a stupid liar.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >> Show how the Montegue Grammer can unambigously represent the 
>>>>>>> meaning of the following sentence:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >> She showed she was a big girl.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When you begin a reply with anything besides
>>>>>> reasoning I will always ignore the rest.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what did I say that WASN'T "Reasoning"
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My system (like the Cyc project) has a unique
>>>>>> GUID for each unique sense meaning of every word.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can't, because there are not finitely enumerable.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I asked, show the full set of UUIDs for the word "big"
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I must first know your intended sense meanings.
>>>>>> showed: seems to mean demonstrated
>>>>>
>>>>> That isn't how it works.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> big girl: seems to mean something like
>>>>>> average maturity for a 10 year old girl
>>>>>
>>>>> Thats ONE meaning. That is your problem, you don't understand the 
>>>>> complexity of Natural Language.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I understand how to eliminate ambiguity by
>>>> mathematically formalizing the body of
>>>> general knowledge as relations between GUID's.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No you don't, as you have shown by not being able to handle the 
>>> statement I gave you.
>>>
>>
>> It was your error of insufficiently specifying
>> which of many sense meanings that you intended.
>>
>> It was not inherently ambiguity it is lack of
>> sufficient specification.
>>
> 
> What did I insufficeintly specify?
> 

Troll



-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning" computable.

This required establishing a new foundation
for correct reasoning.

Thread

A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 10:32 -0600
  Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 17:53 +0000
    Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 12:07 -0600
      Re: A new category of thought dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 13:19 -0500
        Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-01 16:55 +0000
          Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 11:04 -0600
        Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-02 11:49 +0200
          Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 09:26 -0600
            Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-03 12:36 +0200
              Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 09:09 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-04 11:50 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 08:46 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:52 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 11:21 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-12-05 19:57 -0700
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 21:18 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 11:01 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:40 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:47 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 09:16 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 02:04 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:21 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 09:55 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:43 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-06 22:16 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 21:50 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-07 05:32 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-12-07 15:49 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 11:38 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 07:32 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 07:37 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 17:55 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 17:15 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 21:50 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:26 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 07:40 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:47 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 19:18 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 19:00 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 21:24 -0500
                Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 20:34 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 21:57 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 21:16 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 22:22 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 21:50 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 23:20 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 22:30 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-09 07:42 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 10:05 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-09 23:02 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 02:14 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:21 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 07:07 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 10:41 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-08 19:39 +0000
            Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:57 +0200
              Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 11:30 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 10:53 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:33 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:42 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 09:03 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 06:12 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 07:59 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 10:18 -0600
      Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 20:23 +0000
        Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 14:51 -0600
          Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 16:27 -0500
            Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 15:53 -0800
              Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 19:17 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 16:35 -0800
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 20:10 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 19:49 -0800
                Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 19:50 -0800
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:59 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-01 23:11 -0500
          Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 21:39 +0000
            Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 15:59 -0600
              Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 22:44 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 17:19 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 19:21 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:13 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 19:50 -0600
              Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-01 13:02 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 11:15 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-02 10:53 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 08:00 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-03 12:41 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 09:59 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:48 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-05 09:30 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 10:41 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 10:37 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:24 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:39 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 08:59 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-09 15:15 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 10:22 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 12:04 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-14 13:02 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:39 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 20:01 -0600
          Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-01 17:37 +0000
            Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 13:44 -0600
  Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 15:08 -0500

csiph-web